SIDING MATCHING

Post date: Nov 24, 2015 1:42:59 PM

Aluminum Siding Claims

MIA BULLETIN NO. 97-1

The Maryland Insurance Administration (MIA) has received numerous complaints

from homeowners concerning the settlement practices of insurers of claims for damage to

aluminum siding from hail. These complaints allege practices by insurers of paying to

replace only those portions of siding that are physically damaged without regard to the

mismatching between existing and new siding. Failure to adjust such claims in accordance

with policy provisions or the company’s own operations or settlement guidelines may result

in a finding that the insurer is in violation of Section 230A, Article 48A of the Code. This

Bulletin reiterates long-standing MIA policy regarding the settlement of such claims.

The MIA interprets Section 230A, Article 48A of the Code, in the following manner

as to claims for aluminum siding damage under a covered peril made under a “replacement

cost” homeowner’s policy. The replacement of damaged siding with new siding may result in

mismatched siding between the existing siding and the newly replaced siding. In such cases

of mismatching, settlement options include moving undamaged siding from other areas of the

house to replace damaged siding, replacement of both damaged and undamaged siding on

one or more sides of a house, replacement of all siding, and/or an allowance to reflect

diminution in value of the house caused by the mismatch. While the MIA does not interpret a

replacement cost policy to require in every instance, replacement of all siding including

undamaged siding in order to minimize mismatching, insurers whose settlement practices fail

to take into account major differences in color shades, textures, or siding dimensions as

provided above may be subject to action under Section 230A.

Insurers should inform their insureds of any appraisal rights under the policy where

there is disagreement on the amount of a covered loss. See COMAR 09.30.75